Hi Rob,

just a modest question about the helicopter downwash effect on land and water. Are these effects still missing? Maybe you find the time for a quick look.

Thanks a lot

 

I would like to know about this as well.

 

 

Started testing the latest beta build from LM...

 

I've got nothing substantial to add to this thread except to say thank you, Rob, for your continuing insights and reports on how things are going. You're being a great unofficial ambassador for Lockheed Martin as the v2 family continues on, and your discussions here on the forums are appreciated by many!

 

-Greg

Hello !

Can we post somewhere our interest to a profile nivida supporting SLI with p3d2.3 ?

 

Yes ! I'm ready to be part of the pressure team ! Where can we make our voice heard ?

Verified, this has been fixed.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

Awesome... thanks!

Yes ! I'm ready to be part of the pressure team ! Where can we make our voice heard ?

 

Apparently ManuelG is an nVidia representative:

 

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4880478&postcount=380

 

However, I am puzzled how nVidia could get WHQL certified with their latest 340.52 driver when they knew they broke tessellation support P3D in their Beta drivers (several weeks earlier) but still got WHQL certified?  Sorta begs the question what is the purpose of WHQL certification if it's nothing more than a formality with no point of fail?  Meaning something was working in 337.88, was broken in 340.52, but still gets WHQL certified?

 

Certainly make your voice heard with nVidia -- I am disappointed with WHQL certification process, seems like a complete waste of time to me.  Anyway, there is hope the next Beta driver from nVidia fixes what they broke in 340.52.

 

Cheers, Rob.

However, I am puzzled how nVidia could get WHQL certified with their latest 340.52 driver when they knew they broke tessellation support P3D in their Beta drivers (several weeks earlier) but still got WHQL certified?  Sorta begs the question what is the purpose of WHQL certification if it's nothing more than a formality with no point of fail?  Meaning something was working in 337.88, was broken in 340.52, but still gets WHQL certified?

 

Certainly make your voice heard with nVidia -- I am disappointed with WHQL certification process, seems like a complete waste of time to me.  Anyway, there is hope the next Beta driver from nVidia fixes what they broke in 340.52.

 

WHQL means certified by Microsoft. Nothing important really.

We can expect a long time for sli...

As promised, quick video of water in P3D V2.3 beta 2

 

Looks great - much improved. Thanks for taking the time to showcase the changes to the water Rob!

 

Sorry to keep peppering you with questions, but any insight into the performance of the terrain shadows in 2.3?

but any insight into the performance of the terrain shadows in 2.3?

 

Yes, I did test that out, there was a minor performance drop in Hawaii area (setting to max distance 80,000) - I did a recording with and without terrain shadows over same area in Hawaii ... personally I still don't like Terrain shadows.  I'll post video later tonight.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Honestly ladies and gents, some of you are missing the point ... it's really not about FPS, the key is time between frames and keeping that consistent. If the time between frames can be consistent I can fly all day at 15 fps (below that then input lag starts to become an issue). Somewhere, sometime, someone seems to have implied that 60 fps is required ... it's really not and it's nothing to do with Vsync.

 

Anyway, with that said, I'll post a video tonight flying around Hawaii at 72-90 fps and record at 60 fps and upload a very small segment at very high bitrates so you can get to see how the water looks at various altitudes -- I know it doesn't matter how good "I think" it looks, someone will pull it apart (that's just what humans do) ... but I'll get something up tonight and let you folks have fun with it.

 

Regardless, it's good to see the enthusiasm be it positive or negative.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Ill just leave this here...

 

https://frames-per-second.appspot.com

 

 

WHQL means certified by Microsoft. Nothing important really.

 

It's supposed to be more than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHQL_Testing

 

Cheers, Rob.

Yes, I did test that out, there was a minor performance drop in Hawaii area (setting to max distance 80,000) - I did a recording with and without terrain shadows over same area in Hawaii ... personally I still don't like Terrain shadows.  I'll post video later tonight.

 

In my opinion terrain shadows should look smoother. Right now they look way too harsh, and sometimes (especially at canyons) they just look like black splotches everywhere.

 

It's supposed to be more than that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WHQL_Testing

 

I guess their tests of third-party software don't extend to Prepar3D then.

 

 

Ill just leave this here...

https://frames-per-second.appspot.com

 

That's a nice link ... it demonstrates my point very well ... if you set background to be 0 px/s and then set one ball at 30 fps with velocity at 50 px/s and then set the other ball at 60 fps with same velocity at 50 px/s you can see there really isn't much difference visually.  This brings home the point about it being "motion" or the "speed" of which on travels the simulated world (that speed/motion can be head movement, TrackIR, it can be aircraft speed, etc.).

 

In another thread, I did the calculations (looking at world pixel resolution 1m = 1px) of what one would need (in terms of fps) to get the sense of perfectly fluid motion when flying 500 Kts at 500' AGL looking out the side window -- I calculated about 230-240 fps (assuming you have a monitor capable of 240Hz also).   So for 1100 Kts at 500' AGL we're looking at 560-580 fps.  Obviously this is not obtainable with current hardware yet but it is something one can do in P3D.

 

Cheers, Rob.

Apparently ManuelG is an nVidia representative:

 

http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4880478&postcount=380

 

Hum, my initial request here was targeting nor toward the last 340.52 (I can leave without ;-) but toward a SLI Profile !

Verified, this has been fixed.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

That is good to know, thanks for taking the time to check :smile: